Is anyone worried about the ramification of President Obama's actions regarding mental health care and firearms ownership?

SPC Bobby Coble — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 18:47:04 -0500

I'm curious because those with domestic violence convictions are not allowed to own or posses fire arms, meaning, they are not allowed to even carry them for employment. Could this lead to a purge of veterans from service?

Response by PFC Richard Wise made Jan 6 at 2016 2:01 AM

PFC Richard Wise — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 02:01:15 -0500

Mental health care does not disqualify you form possessing a firearm under federal law. A court order to get psychological treatment (which is a commitment) *does* prohibit you from possession of firearms. But just seeing a shrink doesn't count for anything under that law.

This is in the statute, and Obama can't change it. Only Congress can change that. via regular legislation.

The domestic violence part is the Lautenberg Amendment from 1996 which was added for certain misdemeanor domestic violence convictions. A lot of service members were booted after that went into effect because you cannot so much as hold spent brass, let alone a rifle or pistol. There was no military exemption.

Whether or not a D.Violence conviction will prohibit you from possessing a firearm depends on teh specific procedures and legal mumbo jumbo.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 6 at 2016 3:14 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 03:14:23 -0500

The Lautenburg Amendment has been in place for well over a decade. It prevents anyone from carrying a weapon who has a DV conviction. It hasn't caused a major purge and it is a reason to discharge someone

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 6 at 2016 10:23 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 10:23:18 -0500

I have no issue with in erased back ground checks I actually think it's an excellent idea. If I ha e to wait an extra day to get my gun so be it. If it means that someone who shouldn't have one doesn't get one.

Now I think the portion of the law that goes to far is a doctor deals you mentally unstable or a threat to others. He has to report you and you 2nd amendment rights are taking away without due process. So in essence the government is the judge jury and executioner on whether or not you can own a gun.

The loop hole of gun show makes it easy for anyone to buy a gun. That also means anyone with a possible nefarious motive. So I have no issue with there being increased screening none at all.

But why do I have to be a licensed gun dealer to sell a firearm to my brother a friend or anyone in my family. That's a little to far in my opinion.

Even though there are people screaming to the contrary. I don't think this is a prelude to a mass gun confiscation.

Response by CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret) made Jan 6 at 2016 1:49 PM

CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret) — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 13:49:46 -0500

I’m very concerned about the part that delves into mental health – there seems to be a movement to label all combat vets as unstable. I’m also concerned about mental health “professionals” who can make a determination that someone is mentally unstable and then reporting this to the government. Having dealt with a number of these so called “professionals” I can attest many have no clue – I am also worried that their personal feelings regarding gun control could affect their decisions.

Response by SPC David S. made Jan 6 at 2016 2:00 PM

SPC David S. — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:00:59 -0500

As a vast majority believe our political system is broken (2/3rds of Americans) I see the government being very aggressive in the next decade in purging gun ownership. It will be a slow process that will use a campaign of fear, misinformation and legislation to go about making gun ownership a more difficult process. They will use what ever they can even mental health to take away guns. You have to remember this is the same government that allows over 1,000,000 unborn babies to be murdered. I say murdered as if you kill a pregnant person and the baby dies you will be charged with not 1 but 2 homicides. Abortion clinics are way more dangerous than guns however its the narrative that's been created to justify their existence - women's right and all sorts of legal proceedings defining when and where life starts. As the top loses control the rules and walls will start going up.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 8 at 2016 12:17 AM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:17:23 -0500

I haven't read too much on the issue as far as this new proposal involving mental health but I will say that what needs to be addressed and improved upon in the US as a whole is better mental health treatment, coverage, diagnosis & care. I work in a substance abuse facility in Flint MI, 9/10 of our clients are dual diagnosis (they not only are suffering from a substance abuse disorder but a mental health disorder that has gone untreated & teated incorrectly).

If improved treatment is part of this, I agree 100%. My husband is an ex army combat vet and even tho he may deserve to have a gun, it's in his best interest. He's way too unstable & suicidal, so when speaking on this issue, look at the broad spectrum and not just your immediate community. This effects everyone.